Jump to content

P-47 Thunderbolt

Members
  • Content Count

    187
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About P-47 Thunderbolt

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Well, my players are competent. Hey, if it doesn't work, it doesn't work, but I am pretty sure it will.
  2. Speed slot is the box of the "falling" table that you fit in. 1 is the lowest penalty. Difficulty is Average, same as the other checks. Basically by sitting in a seat. Not all seats appear to have seatbelts or the equivalent, so I would just say a passenger seat. If you are standing in the back of a LAAT or milling about in the passenger area of a Nu-class shuttle, you wouldn't be secured. Hmm... well, it isn't upgraded unless the GM spends a Destiny point or something unusual happens, so I hadn't given any though to that... Maybe a +10? That is sort of the point, it is very hard to gain control of a disabled ship, especially in Star Wars where you don't have a rudder and ailerons to steer with, and wings to provide lift. See above. I'm not sure what you mean. The damage is determined by the speed you are going. I adapted the table for fall damage. Thank you! All you need to do is this: you take 10 damage and 10 strain, everyone roll an average Resilience check: *rattle* (Jim rolls 3S and 2A) (Sally rolls 1T, 1S, and 3A) (Bo rolls 1F and 6A) okay subtract success from damage and advantage from strain, but Sally you rolled a Triumph, so you reduce the slot by one, so you take no damage, and Bo, you rolled a failure so you take a crit. That's it, and that's if they don't know how to translate the results. the rest of it is done in your head as the GM as someone translating their own dice pool, its oh I got 3S and 2A okay I take 7 Damage and 8 Strain. Not that hard. All they need to know is to subtract Success from Damage and Advantage from Strain with the added effects of a Triumph and a Failure. If we were subtracting multiple double digit numbers here, I would agree with you, but it is simply subtracting a single-digit number from ten. Am I just so good at math that that seems simple to me even though it isn't to anyone else?
  3. Basic subtraction takes very little time, and seriously, it takes just as much math to calculate damage from a combat check. Fun is subjective, and better rules are more fun for me and my players. Ever heard of stimpacks? 50 credits = 9 health in 2 maneuvers. Lasting wounds add to the seriousness of the situation and make the players think differently (if they don't have stimpacks) (and if they don't have stimpacks, they are probably doing something wrong).
  4. Thinking about it more though, there are enough issues with trying to do this that I think it probably isn't worth it. It would be helpful, but I don't think it's worth it.
  5. My revised proposal: Use the rules for falling, but with the following table: 1st slot is speeds 1 and 2, 2nd slot is speeds 3 and 4, 3rd slot is speed 5+. I dropped the 4th slot on purpose. The pilot makes a check to slow the fall: each Success reduces wounds for all secured characters by 1 and each Advantage reduces Strain by 1. A Triumph reduces the slot by 1, and 2 Triumph mean the pilot executes a brilliant crash landing and no secured characters take damage. Failure, however, results in a Critical Injury for all characters aboard. If a PC is not secured, they must make an Average Athletics/Coordination check to reduce damage: each Success reduces Wounds by 1 and each Advantage reduces Strain by 1. Soak still applies to both, and Failure results in a Critical Injury. If a PC is secured, they must make an Average Resilience check (unless the pilot rolls 2 Triumphs): each Success reduces Wounds by 1 and each Advantage reduces Strain by 1. Soak still applies to both, and Failure results in a Critical Injury. They reduce any crit result by 20, and they reduce Strain and Wounds by Success and Advantage from the pilot. For both secured and unsecured characters, a Triumph still reduces the slot by one (i.e. Speed 3 [2nd slot] to Speed 1/2 [1st slot]) just like the rules for falling. When it hits the ground, the vehicle suffers a Major Collision. Optional: Reduce any Critical Injury result by 5xDefense. If the vehicle is disable through exceeding its HTT or SST this is not an option, as its shields are down. Justifications and changes: Same as in the first proposal, but I decided that even though I had simply missed the 4th slot somehow in the first proposal, it would be prudent to go ahead and drop the 4th slot for a couple of reasons: the 4th provides a +75 to the crit result, which has an approximately 25% chance of killing a character who is not critically injured, and since it probably wasn't the character's fault that he is in this situation, I thought that was unfair. Same difficulty as falling. I added the expenditure of 2 Triumphs. Added "Failure results in a Critical Injury for all characters aboard" this would represent the pilot loses control or panicking. Same as the RAW for falling, same as the original proposal. Added "Failure results in a Critical injury." Changed entirely. Reasoning is fairly self-explanatory, they have an advantage over players who aren't strapped in so they basically reduce double and get a crit reduction. Failure results in a Critical Injury because they weren't resilient enough to withstand the shaking bumping etc. and since it is reduced by 20, there is a 60% chance that he won't get anything above easy, and a 65% chance that he won't get anything lasting. Same. Just like the RAW for falling, so what's to explain? This is exactly like the RAW. Seems fairly straight forward, and if the power is down, the shields aren't powered so no defense. 5xDefense, because it is a Major Collision. I removed the added speed for falling above medium range, because although I stand by my reasoning for why it makes sense, I no longer think it is necessary to include another step. It doesn't really add anything anyway. I removed the additional +10 per speed to the crit for the crashing vehicle, because, like @Ghostofman said, it is too likely to outright kill the PCs as a result of a "Vaporized" result. I removed the part about 3 Advantage indicating the pilot reducing the speed by one, as @c__beck suggested. Working with NPCs and Minions: If counted individually, all minions would die from any fall. Count them in groups of 4, (optional: each group makes a check) and resolve damage like you would for an attack, also removing one minion per group if they get a crit. Demonstration: Speed 1, so it's the 1st slot which does 10 damage and 10 strain. Let's say the pilot gets a Failure. The minions have a cumulative WT of 15 and a Soak of 5, so 10 damage kills one of them, and the crit kills one more, leaving 2 alive.
  6. That is a fine solution for a different problem. My issue is with the difficulty (or lack thereof) for escaping a tractor beam, not the way tractor beams work. I do like that though, I might use it.
  7. I'm proposing something and then putting it through scrutiny in order to improve it, or, if enough compelling arguments are made, scrap it entirely. It is in my nature to provide rebuttals to counter proposals or critiques, in order that they may in turn rebut me. I am not unwilling to listen to opposing positions, indeed, the point of putting it on here in the first place is to have it opposed in order that I may strengthen the rule set or come to the best alternative solution. A vigorous debate usually helps me come to the best solution (at least the best solution for myself). For me, the ideal situation is a proposal, a rebuttal, a defense and counter-rebuttal, and then a back-and-forth with concessions where a proposal is changed into the best possible solution. Much of the time, I do not think that a good argument has been given for why a certain system is better, and therefore don't support it right away. The solution of a Hard Resilience check is a good option in my opinion, but it is not my preference, and as for the arguments from people like @Daeglan where there point seems to be "add, take, or tweak nothing from the book" I tend to disregard their argument unless they can give me a real reason not to. If I misunderstand the rules in the book, or they can show that my proposal would break the game in some manner, than I would welcome an explanation. If I suggest a house rule or a tweak to preexisting rules, it means that I have an issue with the rules and need to either be convinced that there isn't an issue with the rules, or be convinced that my proposal doesn't help matters. To my general point regarding this particular set of rules (or lack thereof), there is ample example and evidence that crashing in Star Wars is dangerous, if not deadly. Therefore, since the RAW do not cover the effects of crashing on the occupants of the vehicle, this is an attempt to rectify that apparent oversight. The goal is not to kill the players, though, as it is in the RAW for falling, that should be a possibility. I have taken advice into consideration and have changed my mind regarding a couple things. I'm going to review this thread and make another post where I state my revised proposal. One final point: @Daeglan's definition of "bog down the game" would seem to extend to many of the vanilla rules. When I tweak tractor beam rules, or rules for crashing, it may take a small amount of time each time you put the rules into use, but these particular rules are not going to be used all that often so the cumulative effect is not particularly great compared to what it would be if I were to suggest rules for handling damage drop-offs or the like where you had to frequently stop to think about something during something as frequent as combat. in this situation, we are talking a glance at a table, 1 roll, and 1 roll for each unbuckled PC (or potentially major NPCs, at GM discretion), then a crit roll for the vehicle if the GM doesn't just say "you fell 2 miles in a ship that had already been badly damaged, it isn't going to fly again" I would not necessarily suggest such an action, but it is an option.
  8. I think that it adds to the enjoyment. If the players disagree, than that's that, but I believe that a good set of rules adds to the fun. I may end up in the middle, just doing an auto-crit and a Resilience check, but at the very least I want to test the system. I'm going to re-asses the set of rules I originally proposed and see what to drop, what to keep, and what to change, but as a whole, I currently like it. One cheat sheet should take care of the "complicated" objection. One reason I don't want to just do a crit is because as the CRB says: "gravity kills." two pointed and accurate words. Gravity does kill, and doling out damage, especially once you get to the incapacitating levels, illustrates that point well and impresses upon the players the gravity of the situation (Ooouccch, I shouldn't have). To fall a mile (even if a ship) and walk away that simply seems wrong.
  9. So give a crit for the crash. The effects of crashing on the occupants are not covered in the collisions rules. In general, that's fine, but with a full-on crash, it becomes an issue. I'm not trying to replicate every scene from the show, that is an example, just like your example of Obi-Wan sliding onto the Invisible Hand in Revenge of the Sith. I'm trying to figure out a way to best handle crashing's effects on the vehicle's occupants.
  10. Okay... WHICH CRIT? I'm telling you, there isn't really anything on the Critical Hit table to affect him! Are you suggesting that he roll a Critical Injury as well? "Fire!" is a possibility, but he didn't really seem to have any burns, just dust and lacerations. Most of his injuries would have probably been internal.
  11. There are 2 crits that effect occupants: "Fire!" and "Jostled" one is hard to get (139-144) and the other one is impossible to get in this situation as a +10 in a crit puts it over 9, the max for jostled (which only deals one strain anyway). In Revenge of the Sith, Obi-Wan skidded into the ship, at an angle parallel to the ground, skidding for a ways before coming to a relatively gentle stop. In "Landing at Point Rain" the same character, Obi-Wan, crashes in his gunship and only he and one other trooper survived. His injuries are not just superficial, and he has to recuperate for a little while. He wasn't even present for the assault on the factory because he was injured and recuperating.
  12. Yes, my question was: Are you proposing that I use the collision rules for characters in a crashing ship, or do the rules for crashing ships already extend to their occupants?
  13. Are you suggesting that I use the major collision rules for crashing, or are you saying that the rules are supposed to extend to crashing?
  14. I am not suggesting that you should always be keeping track of it, but many atmospheric craft have a maximum altitude anyway, and for those that don't, you don't even have to measure it unless they 1. get shot down, and 2. are REALLY high up to begin with. Common sense can indicate that a Gunship on approach is probably not going to be super high up. That is a little bit of a strawman, I am not against the GM eye-balling stuff, I'm against too many things being arbitrary. In this case it is simply tweaking something to allow the campaign to continue. Like you said, it's no fun to get killed outright. I would not define this as railroading, because it is a binary choice of: "campaign end?" vs. "not campaign end." I think it would be acceptable to make a decision in that case in order to preserve the campaign (for that matter, you could just ask the players). "I can't really define it, but I know it when I see it" is more or less how I approach railroading because, as the economist in my dad says, "it depends," on the situation, the circumstances, the result, etc. One argument that could be made in favor of Vaporized not counting in the same way on a crash is that if you are vaporized in space (by a turbolaser blast or what have you) there is nowhere to go, if you are vaporized in atmosphere there is a long drop below you (and you were probably shot or something) but if you were "Vaporized" by crashing into the ground there is somewhere to go, you just need to survive the crash. Not a great argument, I know, and it could be argued in reverse that on a crash a "Vaporized" crit means your ship just exploded, but it is not supposed to be a foolproof argument, it is really just supposed to be an excuse or justification. In the case of an organic "Vaporized" crit, the PCs should probably be dead. If they got a "Vaporized" crit in normal gameplay, then either they did something stupid, or the GM REALLY wanted them dead. I would also argue that this is not the rules glitching out, I would say that this is an unfortunate potential outcome. A couple other options for minion preservation: (1) only a failure results in a crit, (2) if you are strapped in, you get a crit reduction. Roll for each minion group and if you get less than the reduction, they don't get the crit, (3) don't give an auto-crit, and deal damage base on minion health as I mentioned earlier. I'm leaning toward the 3rd option.
×
×
  • Create New...